Sometimes I get excited by the smallest things, tiny things, even minuscule things.

Minuscule is italicized in this, one of my occasional grammar columns, because it is the lead topic. Some of you language wonks probably figured that out right away.

I break into something approaching a smile whenever I receive a proposed letter to the editor or commentary and see minuscule spelled this way, which is to say correctly. With two u”s and only one i.

I believe it is, by far, the most commonly misspelled word that reaches my inbox. Which is understandable because it looks so right when it”s wrong.

No matter how it”s spelled, it is meant to indicate that something is quite small, so why wouldn”t it start out “mini?” Here”s why. Because it starts out “minus,” as in subtraction, as in less. It started its life as the French word for lower-case letters. Small as opposed to large. Less rather than more.

But we”re talking here about English, in which almost nothing is ever completely wrong. For almost every rule, there is at least one person with an advanced degree to argue that the language should be fluid. Miniscule, two i”s, does have its champions. I am not one of them. Any word I can spell correctly should not go with anyone else”s flow within my lifetime.

The main argument for changing minuscule to miniscule is simply that it is so often misspelled that way — Google finds 3.7 million errant miniscules to 10.4 million righteous minuscules. I thought it would have been the other way around.

Here”s the Merriam-Webster online reference: “The adjective miniscule is eymologically related to minus, but associations with mini- have produced the spelling variant miniscule. This variant dates to the end of the 19th century, and it now occurs commonly in published writing, but it continues to be widely regarded as an error.”

Topic 2 regards redundancy and repetition.

“The reason why Jack voted for Measure M is that he had not seen the mailers for Measure K.” That”s almost a fine sentence after you have given it extra points for melding the focus of today”s column with the more regular offerings on this page.

If you”re wondering what”s wrong with it, you can stop. It is the unnecessary inclusion of “why.”

It would be so much better written this way: “The reason Jack voted for Measure M. …”

The only reason people write “reason why,” including too many people I can see from where I am sitting, is that sometimes the sentence might have seemed a little clipped.

Still worse are the sentences that involve the word “reason” and then go on to contain not one but two unnecessary words. As in: “The reason why Sue voted for Measure K is because she likes horse racing.”

Though Herald readers and particularly Herald letter-to-the-editor writers are unusually skilled at the language arts, I have seen quite a few letters with single sentences that include “reason,” “why” and “because.” Let”s work together to end this, OK?

Finally, while my regular column is sometimes labeled called “On the other hand,” a reference to the ambivalence that weakens some of my editorials, there is no name yet for the column when it tiptoes into language and usage. So, I”m asking for suggestions. Anyone?